Corporate bodies, such as businesses and the government, have traditionally been rather slow when it comes to adopting new software and technologies. This is generally for security purposes, and because they don't see the point in upgrading from something that works. This frame of mind is not going to change any time soon; Ars Technica is reporting that the US Army is going to finally be fully upgraded to Windows Vista and Office 2007 by the end of 2009, despite Windows 7 quickly approaching. At the moment, Ars Technica believes that about half of the Army computers are running Office 2007, and 13% are powered by Vista. Marcus D. Good, who is the chief of the Army's Information Technology Systems Support Division, has stated, "The Army has been testing Vista since its release and has run it through the Army Golden Master program. The Army Golden Master program is responsible for the release of the Army standard baseline configurations for commonly used computing environments within the Army Enterprise Infrastructure, the team responsible for making sure applications that ran on XP will run on Vista."
It's unclear how long it will take the Army to make the move from Vista and Office 2007 to Windows 7 and Office 2010 when they are released, but since the changeover will only be fully complete this year, expect it to take a rather long time. It's not a bad thing, though; the Army is serious business, and they need to be 100% certain that their computers are secure and safe. Previews of Vista for members of the Army are available here and here, to help them get used to it, as well as more efficient.
What happens when your joke doesn't work the first time 'round?
This isn't the iran army mind u, we dont run our million dollar hardware on pentium 4 processor with 1 gig of ram on it, lol?
What planet were you living on at the time?
Of course you'd say so, XP troll.
No you just wack it instead right.. (If you can beat them, join them)
I have been in IT for 13 years now an I hear people spout this stuff all the time, just reminds me my profession is filled with people who just aren't that good at using and managing computers. Vista has been in pretty good shape since SP1 for me, drivers are solid and the OS as a whole is far more pleasant to use than XP.
Anyone still complaining at Vista stability for most uses (as in 95% or so, I know there are some very specific issues, but not in general) doesn't know what they are talking about.
LOL, your joke was funny
I can, it was when i wanted to lock my computer which is on a domain
no they are all amd k6II-350 with 64MB ram
Anyone still complaining at Vista stability for most uses (as in 95% or so, I know there are some very specific issues, but not in general) doesn't know what they are talking about.
If you are really an IT then you should know that most highly critical system don't run Windows. There's a reason why ...
I've yet to see a critical data warehouse (like dunno medical informations about millions of patients) running over Windows. Don't say it doesn't exist just i've never ran into one after over 10 years.
US army uses Windows for workstation but i would be surprised to see this system used to guide missiles
Anyone still complaining at Vista stability for most uses (as in 95% or so, I know there are some very specific issues, but not in general) doesn't know what they are talking about.
If you are really an IT then you should know that most highly critical system don't run Windows. There's a reason why ...
I've yet to see a critical data warehouse (like dunno medical informations about millions of patients) running over Windows. Don't say it doesn't exist just i've never ran into one after over 10 years.
US army uses Windows for workstation but i would be surprised to see this system used to guide missiles
Dude, you beat me to the punch. I totally agree. Any mission critical apps DO NOT normally run on a Windows based system. Been in IT for well, let's just say I can remember when personal computers came into the workplace!
That being said, the Gov't organisation I work in has never used Windows for critical apps.
Been in IT for 13 years, hmm that's 1996. I got underwear older than that!
They didn't switch from Windows 2000 to Windows XP until 2004 and I think the mandate for XP was in 2005.
Give it up. Your anti-Vista semantics have gotten old. Vista SP2 is perfectly fine. Lord knows how you have a job in the computer industry given you don't know **** all.
What was so anti-Vista about his comment? Seriously.
PsykX's comparison is valid.
yeah, I thought that would be obvious...If they have any issues with Vista, they'll end up spending another huge amount of money. Not to mention it is a huge improvement in terms of performance, hardware support and more.
Yes, Vista was a epic fail indeed. The only ones who refuse to accept that are some fanboys who have been brainwashed by MS' stupid Vista propaganda (e.g. "The wow starts now": "Wow, *that* many apps and devices don't work on Vista.") Just ignore their "Leave Vista alone, boo hoo" posts.
The US army adopting Vista rather than Win7 just shows that they've got bricks for brains - but we already knew that from them hunting non-existant "weapons of mass destruction" and such.
+1
Microsoft lobbying no doubt. They want to sell all those surplus copies of Vista to someone. The US military is dumb enough to buy practically anything--because of politics.
1) I made my mind up while using the betas that Vista was a good move for me to upgrade from ageing XP, this was long before the 'wow starts now' campaign. Most 'fanboys' don't give a monkeys about marketing campaigns as they generally have the code long before the marketing process begins.
2) All my apps and devices have always worked but maybe that's because i tend to use up to date OS's with up to date hardware and software.
The fact is that there will always be people like you who think your witty and clever and that everyone will like you if you follow the herd.
let's not mention that you used the term 'epic fail' :/
Agreed +1.
The US army adopting Vista rather than Win7 just shows that they've got bricks for brains - but we already knew that from them hunting non-existant "weapons of mass destruction" and such.
When my new windows machine arrived to replace my XP setup it came preinstalled with Vista (I have original XP discs), but I thought rather than screaming "oh no it will never work" and installing XP on it straight away - I gave vista a try, knowing I could wipe after a couple of days if I really wanted - but did I... no because its fine, and better than XP. It may not have been the case on release but now Vista is far superior to XP.
Also moving to the non latest OS is the smart move to do its far more secure, the Military aren't trying to be "hip and cool" jumping on the "Windows 7 wow" bandwagon.
Stop being a tool. Vista runs fine.
Fail.
The US army adopting Vista rather than Win7 just shows that they've got bricks for brains - but we already knew that from them hunting non-existant "weapons of mass destruction" and such.
I love when 7 fanboys make posts like this. Without Vista, 7 doesn't exist. 7 needed the foundation Vista provided. If not, 7 would have XP for a base and that would be a horrific prospect, given XP is made of swiss cheese.
They don't care. Governments and enterprises don't have E-Penises!!
They need a proven, tested operating system, not the latest.
My University has rolled out vista, works fantasic, they have custom login/gadgets etc, all computers have 2GB of ram.
but seriously, vista is great, it just has a lot of negative stereotypes for some reason
but seriously, vista is great, it just has a lot of negative stereotypes for some reason
that how many corporations work, Vista is established at its second service pack. Fixed corrected. They will adopt Win7 when Sp1 or Sp2 gets released.
EXACTLY! Too many people in this thread can't seem to grasp this simple fact.
Psh, you should see the 16bit DOS apps the Navy uses for missile guidance
All I can say without getting into trouble
All I can say without getting into trouble
You should have seen some of the stuff I had to deal with in the Marines.
Sorry if we don't have the matrix looking desktops running on Apple computers as all the movies make it seem.
All I can say without getting into trouble
But most of the 16 bit dos apps were more rock solid than a lot of the 32 bit windows apps of today. When I was using DOS I don't think I ever had an app crash.
I want those sooooo bad.
With something as important as critical military systems you get what works. Nothing more fancy.
You do not risk complex programming crashing where a very simple program will do. Safety and low risk is important.
With all the custom software used by the DoD, the biggest concern is reliability and most off the shelf software is tested rigourously before being widely used. I supported military intelligence systems and reliability was the upmost concern. Minutes of downtime could prove to be catastrophic. Things have probably changed quite a bit since I've been in but I'm sure they take great care in ensuring an upgrade is sucessful.
Last edited by Xerxes on 23 May 2009 - 04:34
Yeah, I get where your coming from and your right of cause
Still, it's not "best business practice." You have to take into account compatibility, downtime to upgrade, project plans. It isn't as easy as "let's upgrade now." Testing needs to be extensive.
Seriously, they should look at a Win7 deployment very quickly.
Seriously, they should look at a Win7 deployment very quickly.
No, but only idiots think the US army should adopt Windows 7 at RTM over Vista which has become established with 2 service packs. (snipped) Why aren't you spouting that the military should keep your favorite thing of all time in Windows XP?
Last edited by rm20010 on 24 May 2009 - 20:28
"Of course, if you're writing the code to control a cruise missile, you may not actually need an explicit loop exit. The loop will be terminated automatically at the appropriate moment."
More likely to happen with Windows eXPired.
You have to realize that most bigger companies spend a lot of time testing an operating system before deploying on a mass scale. Now, add in the fact that you are talking about a government network. I believe at a minimum the OS has to be certified at EAL4 before it can be used on a government network.
You can't just throw away your plans of deploying an OS because a newer one is coming out. That's a lot of time and money lost. Not to mention taxpayers money... Also, Vista is at SP2 now so it's a proven platform where Windows 7 is merely a release candidate. You can bet Windows 7 is being looked at, but won't be used for some time on the Army's network.
I have worked on a few government networks as a Systems Administrator so I am telling you this from personal experience.
When Windows XP came out. We didn't start talking about rolling XP out until it was SP1 and didn't actually start deployment until it was SP2. At the same time we were testing vista through the TAP program.
Last thing that has to be taken into account for a Vista/Windows 7 rollout. You have a lot of people with old hardware and I am talking like pentium 2/pentium 3. Hardware that has reached its end of life. (meaning no warranty support from the vendor) These systems are going to have to be replaced. No way around it.
You have to realize that most bigger companies spend a lot of time testing an operating system before deploying on a mass scale. Now, add in the fact that you are talking about a government network. I believe at a minimum the OS has to be certified at EAL4 before it can be used on a government network.
You can't just throw away your plans of deploying an OS because a newer one is coming out. That's a lot of time and money lost. Not to mention taxpayers money... Also, Vista is at SP2 now so it's a proven platform where Windows 7 is merely a release candidate. You can bet Windows 7 is being looked at, but won't be used for some time on the Army's network.
I have worked on a few government networks as a Systems Administrator so I am telling you this from personal experience.
When Windows XP came out. We didn't start talking about rolling XP out until it was SP1 and didn't actually start deployment until it was SP2. At the same time we were testing vista through the TAP program.
Last thing that has to be taken into account for a Vista/Windows 7 rollout. You have a lot of people with old hardware and I am talking like pentium 2/pentium 3. Hardware that has reached its end of life. (meaning no warranty support from the vendor) These systems are going to have to be replaced. No way around it.
+1
Mind you, typically I would normally hold off, but Win7 has been so good (so far), it makes sense to accelerate its deployment.
We know what we are doing. I currently work as a contractor on the Army's network (as a Systems Administrator) so I am somewhat familiar with the deployment plans for Vista. No talks of Windows 7 even though I have it running on my personal laptop and within my ESX test environment.
http://hothardware.com/News/US-Army-upgrad...-Windows-Vista/
(Source for number of army computers)
I know the navy network I worked on had somewhere around 400,000 machines. They are probably nowhere close to being completely rolled out with Vista either with no plans to roll Windows 7 anytime soon.
I know a friend of mine works on the Coast Guard network. They have been deploying Vista since sometime near the end of 2008. No plans for Windows 7 anytime soon.
It's easy to say just go with Windows 7, but the OS is not final yet no matter how good it seems to work. I can imagine that there are quite a number of software incompatibilities with Windows 7 and the custom applications that are in use on the network.
A lot of sites work on a scheduled deployment/replacement cycle, where after a certain number of years the computing hardware for the end user is upgraded. Both to maximize the amount of usage for computers along with getting the best value for the systems. The decision to go to Vista is probably based on the fact that the majority of Air Force systems are due to be upgraded/replaced, and probably halfway through the migration cycle. The Army is just starting theirs, and will take around three years to complete (based on previous experiences.)
The additional aspect is that the military branches have already put a lot of time and effort into securing the OS to meet their requirements, and to suddenly move to Windows 7 would mean replicating a lot of that work. (You cannot take the position that if a security setting in Vista designed to protect data will be the same in Windows 7, you need to test and re-test to verify that setting. And that will take time.)
Funniest post ever.
That company has my sympathy.
As much as I'm loving 7 at the moment i still haven't deployed it to all machines in my company office (testing it on a couple of boxes and i can't wait to move the lot!
Main reason is that i need to thoroughly test every aspect of a new OS before it goes into our production environment, I'm just a small web media company, now imagine your an organization as huge as the US military!
at the end of 2009 (hopefully) Windows 7 will only be mere months old.
Nice, I never knew that. I was in the Navy in the mid-90's when we had DOS and 3.1
ZOMG your unit suckzorz!!! Vista is so slow and crashes a lot and 7 is WAYYYYYYY better despite being mostly Vista at its core but I'm too stupid to figure that out!!11
There, I imitated half the people posting in here. Your unit made the right move.
yes. building an OS isn't very complicated, however it does require a heafty team, it's not like the days of windows 1.0 where 2 college guys screwed around with DOS and created a goldmine. it's not like sitting around on some fluffy cloud all day long if you know what i mean.
This paragraph shows clearly you haven't the faintest hint of a clue about what is involved in programming. Writing a simple program is one thing - any idiot with VB can do it, just look at the downloads section here. Engineering an OS from the ground up is one of the most complicated things you can attempt.
For example, Windows 98 has about 13 million lines of code, XP has around 40 million, Vista about 50 million. And although the linux core has under 10 million, the debian distro is reported to have over 200 million lines.
So ... not very complicated huh? I want some of what you are smoking!
What should they do then? skip 7 and start testing 8. That way they will never update.
http://www.ubit.ch/fileadmin/UBitMenu/UBitMenuSetupUK.exe
Remember they usually spend billion of dollars at whim and the insecurity level is still increasing, i don't think the strategy to invade and destroy the national infrastructure is a good way to make new friends. :-?
Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!
Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.